an india-free afghanistan or at least an afghanistan where there is less indian influence and where india is not in a way the major strategic partner of afghanistan but look at -- if you look at recent history, all the regimes who were kind of left to themselves and particularly this is very true now about karzai government, nanl i buhl la in 191289 really went very close to india and india also played a major role in sustaining him for the next three years. the same is true today in afghanistan and india has a strategy agreement and pakistan could have prevented that by what i pointed to earlier, by making friends, not just clients in afghanistan. and pakistan has a tremendous in a way a tremendous constituency to appeal to afghanistan because of all afghans are exhausted. all afghans are sick of and tired of fighting. and they want some kind of peaceful settlement p-but the key to that settlement and most afghans that i talk to is in the hands -- not in the hands of the u.s. ironically but in the hands of pakistan. and there comes in the whole issue of reconciliation. pakistan's r

interests in afghanistan. ma mainly neither side wants the taliban to emerge as ultimate victor in afghanistan. neither country wants a taliban-ruled afghanistan. the taliban, we have to remember, is a very anti-shia, anti-iranian organization. iran is a majority shia country. the taliban is influenced by very anti-shia strains of islam. in 1998, in fact, iran almost went to war with the taliban. i remember that year that iran as maed up to 200,000 troops on the border read why i to invade afghanistan. this was because the taliban had massacred iranian diplomats in an afghan city and had also massacred thousands of shia and are supported by iran. and when the united states invaded afghanistan after 9/11, iran was very cooperative. iran viewed the u.s. invasion of afghanistan in very pragmatic terms. back then, of course, the president, who was a reformist, was a reformist, i suppose still, was president of iran. iran was very much concerned about the u.s. reaction to 9/11, was worried about how the u.s. was go

one thing is very clear that pakistan wants an india free afghanistan or at least an afghanistan where there is less indian influence and where india is not the major strategic partner of afghanistan. but look at -- if you look at recently all the regimes who are kind of left to themselves, particularly this is very true now about ckarzaid government. the same is true today in afghanistan and india has a strategic agreement. and pakistan could have prevented that by what i pointed to earlier, by making friend, not just clients in afghanistan. and pakistan has a tremendous constituency to appeal to in afghanistan because of all afghans are exhausted, all afghans are sick and tired of fighting. and they want some kind of a peaceful settlement. but the key to the settlement, most that i talked to is in the -- not in the hands of the u.s. ironically but in the hands of pakistan. and there comes the whole issue of reconciliation, pakistan's role, pakistan's seven tralt in the reconciliation. there can be no reckonciliation unless pakistan actively helps. we know that prime minister yusuf ma

northwestern afghanistan. and there was a pakistani militant shia groups, the leadership was hiding in kabul and there was -- there were some anti-iranian activity maybe. today that kind of regional conflict information is centered in pakistan or in pakistan's tribal areas. you have the imu headquartered where? you have all these other groups headquartered there. so it's not only about -- for pakist pakistan, afghanistan, unfortunately is no longer just a foreign policy issue. it's very much a domestic issue. and i think a smart policy or smart thinking should consider that and make these policies. thank you. >> thank you. no. it is not a question of timing. it is a question of policies before economics. this is the argument i'm trying to make here, that it's not that the projects -- you know, everybody is hedging their bet before 2014. the time line is an american withdrawal time line. it's got nothing do with the regional security problems within the region time line. this is what i'm trying to say. the ques

where afghanistan doesn't. on top of that we are wasting all these american lives over there and providing all the security so china can go in there and take advantage of all the mineral rights in that country. it is amazing what china is doing there. host: mr. wilder. guest: very good points made there. i think one of the issues that i think has been a problem with the u.s. and the broader international community strategy in afghanistan was the large -- the main focus is on the military strategy which was critically important, but often overlooked was the political strategy to guide what we are doing in afghanistan. and i think that's where there needs to be more focus as we head towards this 2014 security transition. is not forget there is also a political transition in 2014 when according to the constitution president karzai is required to step down. he cannot seek a third term in office. and so there's a real opportunity coming for a democratic transition in afghanistan which could lead to stronger leadersh

to invade afghanistan. this was because the taliban had massacred iranian diplomats in the african city of ma zur esharif and massacred thousands of ha czar raz or shia and are supported by iran. and when the united states invaded afghanistan, after 9/11, iran was very cooperative. iran viewed the u.s. invasion of afghanistan in very pragmatic terms. back then, of course, president muhammad ha tammy who was a reformist was a reformist i suppose still was president of iran. iran was very much concerned about the u.s. reaction to 9/11. it was worried about how the u.s. was going to behave toward iran. and essentially both countries were on the same side. iran was helping the northern alliance which was composed of pro-iranian tajik and ha zhara groups. actually, iran was probably the biggest supporter of the northern alliance along with russia and, et cetera. and there were even reports that iran helped provide intelligence to the united states in battling the taliban. the former commander in chief of the ira

previous elections in afghanistan have been criticized and many in afghanistan and the international community have urged the electoral reform. electoral assistance will continue to be an important focus of the australian aid program. we will maintain our support to afghanistan's independent electoral commission. during my visit to afghanistan in october last year, president karzei and i discussed formalizing a comprehensive long-term framework for the future of the australian- australian -- afghanistan partnership. we hope to be in a position to sign the agreement when we meet at the chicago summit in may. this will set out australias enduring partnership with us can stand in development. along with security, trade, and investment as well as cultural, and people to people links. the government of japan will host an important ministerial conference in tokyo in july. the focus will be on the coordination of international assistance through to 2014 and beyond. on the afghan government strategy to sustainable development. in chicago, it is vital that the nations of the coalition restate

how do women in afghanistan -- you have been an advocate of women's rights in afghanistan. how do women in afghanistan see the outreach to the taliban and the broader prospect of political settlement? what is their perspective? >> thank you very much. it is timely for afghanistan to discuss these issues and peace prospects. there was a level of optimism especially in 2010. among society organization and the issue of tradition. especially on the issue of reconciliation. not because there was really they had good memories of the taliban regime but because people were tired of stability in the country and wanted to have a solution. working with different stakeholders particularly among groups, bad memories that they have from the taliban regime. with the passage of time and changes that happened in the last two years unfortunately that level of optimism doesn't exist anymore. there is lack of transparency and has been graywacke of transparency in the process. there has been lack of conclusive list in the process not only in women's groups but broadly from the private sectors a

afghanistan does not have a tradition. the government is also correct. >> explain the corruption thing. >> they have a corruption index. they rank countries from most corrupt to least corrupt. afghanistan was at the top of the chart. in 2009, they may be slipped a little bit. through the years, they climbed the rankings to be with the most corrupt places on earth. >> can you see this when you are their? can you see the money and what they have done with it? >> i remember being in an old british fort by the capital of the province. you could look down. it was on a hill. you can see these fast new compounds. >> what about the drug story? what have we done about fighting the drug is? >> we have gone back and forth. we really empower the drug lords to drive out. after they were gone, it left them. to have power again. there are times where we have narcotics. there would be arguments within the military. we would have something grotesquely wasteful. it would be completely ineffective in terms of counter narcotics. it was a lot

in afghanistan, the transition to afghanistan lead security responsibility in 2014.nder the constitution president karzai's term expires in 2014, which means there will be a presidential election. and one question is, will that presidential election result in a president with authority and support throughout the country, or could it be a repeat of the last couple elections which were contested and a source of division? accompanying the security transition strategy, could you say a little word about the political transition strategy and how the administration sees on the political side getting between where we are now and 2014 and beyond? >> thank you very much. let me just add my thanks to all of you and if i could add my thanks to usip and all the people who organized this wonderful event. it's an honor to be on this panel. i might if i could say a special word of thanks to steve hadley, who in the year i have been the special representative for afghanistan and pakistan has been particularly well in his counsel of others. i appreciate it very much. i think the quest

it does look to me like afghanistan does actually have the potential to revert to the 2001 afghanistan. if we apply the end game the obama administration applied in iraq, i think that's. >> just a recipe for an afghanistan that reinforces the al qaeda narrative. this is their big victory. ten years they achieved nothing, they control the country. why wouldn't al qaeda make that essential node of their worldwide operations? it would feed the narrative that we spent so much time and effort trying to pull up by the roots. and to substitute with a narrative that's about us having a positive vision for the country. it's certainly a battle of narratives and who has a battle we 4r play into. america's ability to change and influence the world whether it's worth it to do it. but i think it feels to me a lot like the end of vietnam. these countries don't deserve our help. they're fighting against us as well as with us. our ideas and values aren't something they share. it's been too expensive and too hard to try to create positive change. while i'm actually sympathetic to a lot of the emotion be

i'm originally from afghanistan. i work as a subject matter expert at the marine university in quantico, virginia. welcome back home. it's a very good presentation. very motivational. i mean, we -- for a long time, we saw good news coming from home. so what -- how do we convince the american public? how do we send these images into the american media so that we can convince them to stay committed to -- or have some more patience to -- in this fight against terror? thank you. >> well, i guess that's one reason why i'm on this tour here for the next ten days, is to get around and try and get the word out to a variety of different people. i also -- i told the marines that -- folks that just left afghanistan. i've had conversations with the commanders. conversations to try and explain to them, you know, what they've accomplished. because it's difficult sometimes for them to put the whole picture together. so as a leader, my junior leaders, their job to sort of put that picture together. hey, you did a great job down here

afghanistan and afghanistan going to be any better off once the u.s. calls out there before the u.s. and turkey and afghanistan are screwed there's nothing we can do to stop it there's nothing the coalition can do nothing that anybody can do because there's tribal factions that go back for generations in afghanistan that we have nothing to do we can't control we can't stop so yeah afghanistan screwed and you just went into. some of the that the hurdles that have always been in afghanistan and some people argue that it was a war that was never winnable to begin with the. wars that wars have to be won not just on the battlefield with troops and bullets and band-aids not with not just with be the bullets and by this but wars are done by politics and we close it said that war is politics by other means war is an instrument that states use to accomplish some sort of political goals the problem with afghanistan and iraq and the whole global war on terror is that there is no political clarity started from the bush administration and carried on by the obama ad

out of afghanistan. -- to kick the u.s. out of afghanistan. he wrote about the fact that we were kicked out of iraq. the way we got out. what was your reaction? >> in might be a good thing. >> is it time for us to leave? >> yes. >> you talk about the history of different world governments involved in afghanistan. give us a brief breakdown. >> working this, and had a rough time. -- alexander the great and getting this, had a rough time they're atthe british tried to subdue afghanistan going back to the early 19th century. >> why were they interested? >> they were sparring with the czar and the russians. they're moving down. this was over control and central asia. -- this was over control in central asia. the islamic republic was under and they were worried about encroaching on india. it seems to become a very crucial part of that. >> people reject the british. how times did they lose? >> the british have lost a couple of wars there. they came to a stalemate during world war i. the british basically withdrew. after the afghans gained control ove

is an afghanistan until 2024." it sounds like we have troops in afghanistan until 2024. we pull our troops out next year. iran is in the middle, iraq is on the other side. we went into iraq and afghanistan and was surrounded iran, and of course the israelis want to attack iran because they feel that iran will wipe israel off the face of the mat. we are surrounding them. this is scaring the daylights out of iran, ok? we are staring iran into getting any clear weapon. -- scaring iran into getting a nuclear weapon. host: are you saying that the pact is not a good idea? caller: excuse mate? and saying that you are a gop political arm -- host: no, we got -- caller: until 2024 -- host: caller, we got that point -- caller: sounds like troops will be there adel 2024, which is what john mccain wanted. host: all right, thanks for waiting and. -- for weighin in -- weighing in. this is "the washington post." "after more than a year of negotiations, u.s. and afghan officials reached an agreement affirming the u.s. comm anditment -- commitment for a decade. "the wall street -- journa

it's very easy to be pessimistic about the situation in afghanistan, the transition in afghanistan, and the u.s. relationship with pakistan. clearly in both clearly there's problems with corruption, problems with relations between civilian and military parts oof the government. there is a good deal of violence in both koun 2ris. -- countries. some eare lated to insurgency. some more terrorist in nature. strange relationships between government officials and criminals, war lords and commanders. it's a challenging environment to work in. and the relationship in the united states broke down pretty severely. here we are nearly a year later and we're still struggling to redefine that relationship. it's somewhat harder to be optimistic about the situation in both countries. but saying the situation is completely hopeless is not particularly helpful for those trying to figure out how to move the countries forward. in afghanistan, we can observe at least that ten years ago, the country was essentially a medieval theocracy. say what you will about the state of the government and the economy, bot

well afghanistan existed before the western military intervention. so you know we're going to stay there forever of course not the many ways the country's been me worse by the intervention not just for somebody there was killed and injured by the war. you know corruption is increased in the massive flows of cash and so i'm so there has to be process of rebalancing the afghan economy so it's not so dependent on foreign flows. and quarter country could grow things and supposedly there are plans underway to assist the country in transitioning away from poppies which you know are very critical for cash crop. these user these are things that can happen if there is seen effort. to really know about you know afghanistan's pearlie one of the poorest countries in the world it's not likely they're ten years from now it's going to be one of the richest countries in the world but the basics could be provided to the population so you can have universal health care and you can have universal education when you have the there grading are really could be largely eli

policy in afghanistan.the former adviser to general stanley mcchrystal said afghan forces were not ready to take over as the u.s. prepares to withdraw in 2014. and questions the credibility of the afghan government. he was joined by the former u.s. ambassador to afghanistan, ronald neumann. this is an hour, 15 minutes. >> good morning. my name's robert lamb, i am the ther of the d the director at csis. thanks all of you for coming. i want to start by thanking finmeccanica for making this day possible. please, silence your cell phones so that we're not interrupted during what i think will be a lively discussion on afghanistan and pakistan. we will be live tweeting this event from csic underscore.org, so if you see mr. cordesman playing with his cell phone, that's because he's tweeting the entire event. we will take questions for the audience. please, wait for the microphone to come to you because we are, we are live streaming this over the internet, and we want to make sure that everybody can hear your quest

commander of all of our forces in afghanistan. it is general john s. >> let's sit down and talk. >> right. >> you have had an interesting few months here? >> i have. >> it will be nine months shortly. i have had a chance to serve with some of the finest groups i had ever seen. >> there is overwhelming of troops who are magnificent doing their duties and fighting taking their fight and marines urinating on dead taliban with the korans being accidentally burned with the alleged atrocities. >> there have been tens of thousands of u.s. troops that come to this theater over the period of time in the conflict. the vast, vast majority of them have demonstrated great respect for the faith of islam, they have created great friends ships. deep friends ships. individual events can create a setback. they have. we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that the relationship is founded on the individual deets of courage and honor of tens of thousands on so many. >> this relationship is very resilient. it has been built on the shared sacrifice of our

plus a decade after a decade of war and billions of dollars down the drain support for the war in afghanistan is at an all time low and now the afghan government is planning to downsize their own military force so is it time for the u.s. to cut its losses we'll explore. and student debt can be hard to deal with sometimes that means taking on two part time jobs or just being a part time student but two college students are facing debt and a whole other way we'll show you their artwork in just a few minutes. it's thursday april twelfth five pm here in washington d.c. i'm liz wall and you're watching our team. oh starting off this hour by taking a look at the role n.g.o.s play in shaping public perception of world events in libya western funded non-government organizations highlighted the bloodshed in massacres incited by them live by libyan leader moammar gadhafi and it's this information that helped justify western military intervention and the public fed it these reports by these organizations and the mass media led the support led to the support of toppling dictators and the. subsequent chan

from al qaeda based in afghanistan.hat's why we were there. after that, the objectives group to try to stabilize afghanistan and prevent it once again returning to an environment which could provide safe havens for groups like al qaeda. so it is important to remember why we are in afghanistan. in the last 10 years lots of progress has been made in terms of defeating al qaeda in afghanistan. there's very limited presence in afghanistan now, which is why president obama has set a timeframe to withdraw the majority of troops from afghanistan, i think. the question is right. terrible things happen in afghanistan and our troops are put in very difficult situations and have done a fantastic job. but i think the time is for the majority of international troops to withdraw. but i think that needs to be done responsibly, because i think if we completely pull the legs out from the situation in afghanistan, i think you could easily see the structures collapsed. so i would argue that we need to withdraw but it needs to be in a resp

combat withdraw from afghanistan. the defense minister said earlier this week will be needed to "ensure afghanistan's stability." "the washington post" reports that since the invasion, almost 2000 troops have been killed and 15,000 wounded in afghanistan. >> thank you, everyone. please have a seat. good afternoon. everybody. we have had quite a week. i consider this to be the highlight, because we're talking about probably one of the most important issues in front of the american public right now, and that is the way ahead with our involvement and partnership with afghanistan. this cannot be more timely to have these two ministers, minister wardak and minister mohammadi, with us. a very important. they are making news while they are here. a very important that they are willing to take some of this time to share with the broader community. i ask you to engage in be respectful of the importance of the day ended their commitment to making this a good session. let me turn to bob lamb, who will be formally introducing thes

in afghanistan. in 2001, iran helped u.s. go to afghanistan. not that the u.s. uses afghanistan to attack its soil. it wants that it recognizes the cooperation that they can give. it wants u.s. to give it recognition of regional leadership. ponder on that. and also it would like it to separate the nuclear from afghanistan. these are the demands on that side. >> yeah. i agree with you, i just don't think the united states and iran can come to terms on those dilemmas. those are not things that we can give iran. >> okay. just my final word is it's -- even though i have been a realist on this, i actually do believe diplomacy can save the day and should stave day. i think that obviously let us consider that it may not be about afghanistan and the solution to your problem of how can we get the countries not to interfere in afghanistan is actually -- understand that each of these countries or groups of countries have their own security problems. the kashmir problem, the iran problem, the gulf problem, et cetera, et cetera. you need diplomacy to go around and at least h

in afghanistan, the transition to afghanistan lead security responsibility in 2014. but under the constitution president karzai's term expires in 2014, which means there will be a presidential election. and one question is, will that presidential election result in a president with authority and support throughout the country, or could it be a repeat of the last couple elections which were contested and a source of division? accompanying the security transition strategy, could you say a little word about the political transition strategy and how the administration sees on the political side getting between where we are now and 2014 and beyond? let me just add my thanks to all my thanks to usip and all the people who organized this wonderful event. it's an honor to be on this panel. i might if i could say a special word of thanks to steve hadley, who in the year i have been the special representative for afghanistan and pakistan has been particularly well in his counsel of others. i appreciate it very much. i think the question, steve asked a great question, which is

i've got the coast guard's road in afghanistan. i've got the water treatment plan that the state department did in iraq that was almost $277 million that we know. found only operating at 20% of capacity because of the failure of the iraqi folks to knowing how to operate or maintaining it. i've got the fallujah water waste treatment system in which was a state department, defense department joint project. is there any argument or pushback from any of you on the sustainability front that this has been a failure and that even going as we speak we're building things in afghanistan, that will not and cannot be sustained? >> clearly at least from the defense department perspective, we have not always covered ourselves with glory in this area. you've listed those examples. in august we did create the afghanistan resource oversight council. i think we're in our fourth or fifth meeting of that. it has been chaired by alan estevez, the assistant secretary of defense and basically filling in as principal deputy. mike mccord is the principal d

afghanistan. general petraeus gave the authors full access to him and his team for the book. this is about an hour. >> good evening. i'm co-owner of politics and prose, along with my wife. on the health on behalf of the entire staff, i'd like to welcome you here. before turning to our guest authors, i'd just like to say a word about an important event coming up this april. it's being called world both night, and it's an ambitious attempt to hand out 1 million free books around the united states. you can read about how this amazing effort is being organized at sign up to get involved yourself at u.s. dot world book night.org. i have mentioned this deceiving because the deadline to sign up is tonight, so there still time after this event. and now a word about our guests this evening. paula broadwell and vernon loeb and their new book "all in: the education of general david petraeus." petraeus of course has become the most prominent u.s. military general since world war ii. and while he's already bee

we will withdraw our troops from afghanistan before the end of twenty twelve. ok you want to reassess that francis. and fast or large ones cooperation other european their defense system however pulling out troops in afghanistan earlier than planned that sour relationships with germany for example who are investing a lot in that effort. i think our analysis is that our military intervention is not able to add a value that allows a peaceful solution to the crisis in the conflict in afghanistan apply our military intervention there we lost the ability to act on political and diplomatic levels we want to regain freedom in our room to maneuver politically and diplomatically in order to find a solution together with major regional players in a conflict that requires to first withdraw our troops from afghanistan would we believe that a military solution is doomed to deadlock and. we do not believe that the solution to the conflict in afghanistan requires a military only approach otherwise we would have solved the conflict already synchronized attacks by the taliban i

economic transition plan for afghanistan. the world bank report talks about what's going to happen with or without chicago. you can see that and the issues are raised in the department of defense report. some of these facts, as ron points out are who picks the facts. we have three reports on this kwar that matter. and i would suggest it's about time we start reading them. because we only have one fiscal year to make this transition and we' already made most of the decisions. >> there one source has to do with numbers another has to do with politics in afghanistan, the government and so on. we would like your thoughts on those. >> the original question was whether making plait book clearer would be an advantage. tony talked about how dismal the playbook is. and with the usual deference that i have for my colleague, i agree the playbook is not real good. and frankly, i think our choice of numbers is really too low. even what we are going to do, if it is understood and publicized does have value within the political system, whic

commander of all of our forces in afghanistan. general john s. >> let's sit down and talk. >> right. >> you have had an interesting few months here? >> i have. >> it will be nine months shortly. i have had a chance to serve with some of the finest groups i had ever seen. >> there is overwhelming of troops who are magnificent doing their duties and fighting taking their fight and marines urinating on dead taliban with the korans being accidentally burned with the alleged atrocities. >> there have been tens of thousands of u.s. troops that come to this theater over the period of time in the conflict. the vast, vast majority of them have demonstrated great respect for the faith of islam, they have created great friends ships. deep friends ships. individual events can create a setback. they have. we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that the relationship is founded on the individual deets of courage and honor of tens of thousands on so many. >> this relationship is very resilient. it has been built on the shared sacrifice of our years

ten years in afghanistan. nine years in iraq. and it's a chance to hear from our witnesses on some of these reforms that are necessary to improve the stewardship of our taxpayer dollars and some very challenging environments. this past august, as was noted, the bipartisan wartime contracting commission issued their final report on its investigation over government's use of contractors in iraq and afghanistan. and in my view, the commission came to a very troubling bottom line conclusion. it was estimated by the commission that out of the $206 billion we spent on service contracts in iraq and afghanistan, which includes everything from building military installations to training election workers, between $31 billion and $60 billion was lost to what they termed to be avoidable waste. so out of $206 billion spent on service contracts, between $31 billion and $60 billion lost to avoidable waste. is a difficult environment. winston churchill once said the only thing certain in war is that it is full of disappointments and also full of

in iraq and afghanistan. they perform with extraordinary skill and bravery under tough circumstances. getting this overseas contracting right, especially in the area of reconstruction and development, is critical to consolidating the hard-won gains that they have achieved the thanks for holding this thing. i look forward to hearing from our witnesses today. >> thank you, senator portman. if our first panel of witnesses would come forward. and while you were doing i will introduce you. mr. ginman retired as a rear admiral to u.s. navy after 30 years of service in 2000. prior to assuming his current position he served as principal deputy to the director of 2008-2010, and deputy director, contingency contracting and acquisition policy from 2010 until assuming the position as director. patrick kennedy has served as undersecretary for management since 2007. he has been with the department of state for 39 years and has held positions including director of the office of management policy rightsizing innovation, assi

in afghanistan. [ applause ] she wins the prize for having to work the hardest to get here, and to do what she does. when she was 5, sadika fled to pakistan during the soviet occupation, and returned to afghanistan hampered by her own lack of education. i mean, to afghanistan, which was hampered by a lack of education. there are about 30 million people in afghanistan, and when she came back, fewer than 900,000 children, mostly boys, had any access to education. along with three other women, she cobbled together enough money to begin the education of 36 girls in an abandoned mosque in 2003. through the learning center, she now educates more than 3,400 girls in 6 schools, 200 women at 4 literacy centers. [ applause ] and 120 women in a community college. she's established the family welfare center for the elimination of violence against women, a domestic violence prevention initiative that serves 14,000. she received her own bachelor's degree in international relations from mt. holyoke college in 2009.

places like nari surage which today is the most kinetic district in afghanistan. it's changed dramatically over the past year due to some of the things we did this year. but so there is still some taliban insurgent activity there. then in upper helmand valley, places like haji ki. places like that. the taliban are on their heels. because we recently -- it was really the last piece of real estate we cleared was haji ki dam. so they're on their heels. but behind them is a transit area for drugs, for poppy growth, that's owned by our friend that i just mentioned earlier and his boys. they still own that territory. at this stage, we are no longer in the business of clearing real estate. it is now the afghans providing the security. so from south to north, it gets increase -- it's increased taliban involvement. taliban funding. et cetera. but you're absolutely right. there is -- there are a lot of local nationals who get themselves into trouble, who get an opportunity to make a few bucks by planting an ied. they're really not taliban. they're just people that quite hon

afghanistan is a public policy matter.nds up cramping, i think making our conversation about"áj @&h(% deficient and it also ends up being that you have this conversation that happens, where you know, the relationship to israel comes up in the narrow confines of the things that you're talking about in terms of american institutional jewry and so forth. >> and in fact i think actually we as american jews have a responsibility to make it very clear, that all americans have the right to have strong opinions about this. they can even be stupid and wrong opinions about without being called antisemites. that's one of the major things, actually. and i should say that peter, thank you for writing this book and only a jew could have wrote this book. any other person would have been destroyed. the truth is, a weaker democracy doesn't make a better, better or more secure country. the president of the israeli parliament in 2003, he wrote a public letter saying if we will continue with this path, of building more settlements, and subsi

now tonight we're going to take a look at the announcement that afghanistan is going to cut its security forces by one third and that's after the nato mission ends in two thousand and fourteen but it's not the wrong time because in that case why did we spend all of that money and all that time training a larger force and it turns out of the treasury department is only used three percent of the funds and a program created to help states with the hardest hit homeowners it's part of chart we have to ask why the banks got bailed out but struggling homeowners aren't a priority we have all of that and more fear night including those of happy hour but first let's take a look at the mainstream media has decided to miss. well today has been a day of days for the mainstream media and by that i mean we have seen an all out media firestorm erupt over a cognate made by a democratic strategist named hillary rosen. the push and pull over women's issues is only getting started conservative blogs pounce on a comment made by democratic strategist d.n.c. adviser and our friend hilary rosen. about romney's